Does the yaesu ft 1000 mp Mkv 's really fry amps ?

Discussion in 'Discussions, Opinions & Editorials' started by KF7TFO, Dec 5, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. KF7TFO

    KF7TFO XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I would really like buy the ft1000mp Mkv ,but have heard about the initial power frying amps. I have an ALS 600 amp and hoped to use the class A 75 watts as the exciter. I only run ssb,voice. Any thoughts ? thanks KF7TFO chuckarseneau@gmail.com
     
  2. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    See answer for your previous post.
     
  3. KF6ABU

    KF6ABU Ham Member QRZ Page

  4. KF7TFO

    KF7TFO XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    so what would YOU do ? get the field version with 100 watts ? or for a few more pennies get the ft2000 ?
     
  5. WA7PRC

    WA7PRC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Neither. I'll continue to use my TS850S. Compared to a rig with a properly designed and operated Class AB PA, there's no significant advantage to using a rig that has a Class A PA.
     
  6. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I had a MK V for a few years and it was a "nice" rig to operate; however unless modified, they all have issues.

    One issue that's difficult to recognize until you put it side by side with a better receiver is, its receiver just really isn't very good. Under contest conditions, strong stations seem wider than they really are, the noise blanker pumps and creates pretty bad artifacts, etc. Using it "alone" it's hard to tell. I placed it next to my TS-850S using a 50 Ohm power divider to run the antenna connection to both of them and tuned around on both for a couple of hours before I decided that MK V either needs serious work or it's going up for sale.

    And it wasn't just "mine," they're all like that. Transmitted IMD isn't good, either (but then, neither is the TS-850S, frankly -- wasn't one of Kenwood's best efforts when it comes to transmitter IMD). I have two neighbors who used MK V's for a while: Dave WA6DKN and Neil K6SMF. Both close, LOS for our antennas. They both always seemed "wide" to me, no matter what receiver I used. When Dave dumped his and started using an IC-7800, wow! -- what a difference. His signal is still 60/S9, but now he's so "narrow" I can work stations only 3 kHz up or down the band from him, which I couldn't do before. Same thing happened with Neil, when he ditched his and started using a K3. Neil's only 1 mile from me and has five towers with monobanders on them, which I can see from my driveway. He's very strong, but now so "clean" it's a pleasure to share a band with him.

    So my recommendation would be: Unless the MK V's been well modified to reduce those issues, or you want to do that yourself, don't buy it.:eek:
     
  7. KF7TFO

    KF7TFO XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Thank you for that you just saved me a lot of greif !!! Being new to this is frustrating some times,but yourself :eek: and others support is marvelous ! MERRY CHRISTMAS AND THANK YOU AGAIN !!!!!!!
     
  8. WA7PRC

    WA7PRC Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm curious if you know of any hard evidence (e.g. spectrum analysis or tabulated data) to back this up.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2012
  9. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Yeah, check QST July 1991 issue, pages 43-44. They actually went out of their way to comment on the fairly mediocre TX IMD performance, and it's been well verified over dozens of units.

    Also check QST April 1992 issue, page 68, where they tested the TS-450S and comment how much cleaner it is for TX IMD than it's "bigger brother," the TS-850S.:eek:

    I have an 850S and it's a good rig, but I just about never use it at 100W output power. I drive my amp with ~60-65W from the 850S and it does seem cleaner there. That's good, because that's all the drive my amp needs.:p
     
  10. WA7PRC

    WA7PRC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thanks. I found the article. It's interesting what they said about IMD on fone. Yeah, it's not great. FWIW, in the five years I've had mine, no one has complained to me about splatter. Yet. The good news is, using Morse, IMD is zero. ;)

    I've never bothered to monitor drive power to my amplifier. On fone, I drive it to just below where it clips, as shown by the monitor oscilloscope. On Morse, I drive it to no more than the I[SUB]GRID[/SUB] limit.
     
  11. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    No IMD on CW, that's sure true.

    I've had a TS-850SAT since new in 1990 and I think it's a very good rig in almost all ways but I never use it at "full power," since I can't think of any reason to do that. My amps only require either 10W drive (4-1000A homebrew, grid driven) or 60W drive (AL-80B), so that helps keep it cleaner.

    But my "neighbors" (I do have about a dozen who live within a few miles and are very active on HF) do notice when I go from the 850S to my TR-7 (for example) and do proclaim, "Wow, I can get within 3 kHz of you now!" (which they cannot with the 850S).

    I think if you have no close neighbors on HF, 99% of the time having somewhat higher than desired IMD wouldn't really matter. Unfortunately, I do have close neighbors on HF, and none of them are using junk...they're using good stuff, we just happen to be close and LOS to each other so we all notice any time anyone changes anything.:p
     
  12. WA7PRC

    WA7PRC Ham Member QRZ Page

    If I get a round tuit, I'll drag out the SA and peek at how wide my 850 is. It's just a SWAG but, there may be a lot more splatter generated by not correctly adjusting an amplifier with a very clean exciter, than by using a not-so-clean exciter barefoot. I cringe when I read about someone just tuning for maximum CW power. When I did that and then looked at it with a 'scope, the flat topping was very ugly. I bet I was as wide as a barn door.
     
  13. VE7DQ

    VE7DQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Steve, you are fortunate that your ham neighbours are tolerant of critique and technically savvy.

    In many cases, his buddies will tell a guy that he sounds just great and tell critics to go pizzup a rope! Usually the first question outa their mouths is "Wut kinda receiver ya usin'?", and it goes downhill from there. Many are OFs, so it's not just the noobs. They. just. don't. care!

    As I type this, I'm listening to the ridiculous and sublime firing up on 80 meters. Oh well... <Rant off>
     
  14. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Well, "cockpit error" by operators is pretty common, among newbies of course, but also often among older and experienced operators who just can't fathom that their receiver isn't as great as they thought it was. Exacerbated by operating with preamps on, noise blankers and other issues that make receivers worse in most performance respects.

    When I check signals out here, I never rely on one receiver. I usually switch from the TS-850S to the Orion, to the TR-7 to the 75A-4. If someone's signal is ratty and wide on all four, especially if he's not that local and not even close to overloading anything, I become convinced it's really "him.":p
     
  15. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Problem is, a lot of barefoot transceivers without any outboard amps at all aren't very clean, and with SS rigs, there's nothing to tune up. One thing that does impact signal cleanliness is TX loading, even with "no tune" SS rigs...and I've noted my SS rigs are absolutely cleaner if I use their internal ATUs to provide a nearly perfect match to their PAs (barefoot).

    Good reason for an internal ATU, even if one's antennas are "pretty close" and the transmitters don't fold back on power.
     
  16. WA7PRC

    WA7PRC Ham Member QRZ Page

    This might explain the recent FCC expansion of HF fone segments... to accommodate more splattering SSB signals using amplifiers that are underloaded/overdriven. :p
     
  17. WB2WIK

    WB2WIK Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I think that's it.

    Don't forget to mention that on CW there are still a lot of rigs out there that create key clicks. The FT-1000MP/MKV is one of those. That's the CW equivalent of splatter.:p

    For several years the only modern rigs (popular transceivers) I ever heard on CW that were absolutely click-free bore the Ten Tec label. Now, Elecraft and others have joined those ranks. But for a while there, it was really common.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page